=i :
Augiift 12.
AUTHENTIC.
Jon* RtjyLEDGE, of South Carolina, is ap
pointed Chief jyftice of the of the
United States.
The treaty h»« betrt iondcraried by a rrteetin§>ift. Sa
vannah —which alio burnt Mr. Jay and Mr. Ounn irt
Effigy.
A rtieeting iA Christ Church pari#), 8. C. Jvtve re
fo]ved that r hcapprove ol" t!ie rorwiiiet of then teilo'V
ci'i-zens m Cliarlefton, ill oppottHg the impending
treaty.
Our latu'} adyLcis fto»n* Spain art' f» the middle! of
June, %_a Captain fon-.-s, via Clarlc'ion—peace hail
scot tl.e.* been a-nouftced at Cadiz, but was daily etf-
pe&fed:
L->rd Bdt», tile net*- TVitilK AmbaTadtfr to tlie court
bf "Soon arrived -it Cadiz while Joiles v. as there
ami let off in jpr»-.at Jiafte for Madrid.
BeSs are r'.-"V laid, that no treaty will ever b';
feed between the United States and Great-Britain.
Fro n GsfrffyoildenlS,
Tlie art? employed to irritate the public m : nd are
is wicked as the enemies of oar peace arc vindictive and
Unprincipled —In A Bollon paper, and the-article has
been publiflied in .nore than one Gazette in this city, it
is aflerted without artv Qualification—" That the Bruiih
had revoked fhiir orders [to Capture American vefleis]
until they had his [John Jay's] permiflion to renew
them."
It ought to be remembered fafs a correfpondetit that
our intelligent dirrct from from France has tor some
time p ift anticipated that received by the way of Eng
land—The ac.<iums> of the fete of liie Fr-nch linances
have been tranflatcd from P;irispapers — Fhejalt d > Tee
on this impdrtarif fubjeA exited but nine day;, it was
the mth ivTav, and fnrnendel the 7th J'tne —
but act ording ro the debates in the Convention, that
was fli'fkient lime to produce great mifchie'f, and di
lan latidn of the satl-rrut property.
it is rorli'f/Tcd by many ;>f the printers of this coun
try at .ntich ialVr, a.rl n -re for their inrerelt to ahufe
the .>.'u* erri.neiit of t'tK- United State , thro' the majority,
lr; ii' 1 , :jy■! nuiKni'cf'ntjtii.i.Sytiian even to tell the truth
r fpe.Ti.. l the minority.
On .'mildly lalt a valuable hoffe wa» said to be
drowned at flamilton's wharf—and in the morning of
;er ill to water was drove by
Ifiat .my, ar.
ier c! Itecl Vim with ft ones", into
the iTO'ri which heWas fjve<i with difficulty
—The which is nobecome frequent, os-boys
co'lcci n.7 to'fwi n 0:1 Sabbath days, at one of the molt
public wharves, in the -center ol the city, reflects no
2 n : .l.'(l:'
gre.it honor on its gu 'rdians.
ft his beiu mentioned as a great aimfe of the pri
vilsEje of fratifc}:! jln this country, that fume mem
bers of Corgrefs ihoutg have sent by a (ingle mail,
from nn to four iui'idr;.
beea said t!!?( fliiris, handkerchief?, tea, &c. have
been Franked—but all fur prize will '
when it is known tti.it S>odle» of Verifon were ior
merlv. under over of lids tr.mfmitred
through the iinidilh po(t-ofßcc. Mr. Dent, a
number of the B'i-ilh' House of Coinm.ii.s, i:i a
deb ■.!,■■ ti'ion the f.ibjfcl of frank I *!', April 13,
1795, I'dicl, " That Veniion lihil paHcd as nimbly
by post, as it run when all re in its native park, ar.d
there yet remained many limi'ar iniljnces which re
qnii fcd a remedy."
Mr. Ffc-NNO,
The Ailrdra of this momirig informs its readers, that
.-re are only t'vo writer* in favour of th; treaty —
PKe readers of I'j/ri paper only,are really obliged to fo~ne
b.-i; for this information—judging from what they had
been indulged in reading, they muff have concluded
that the treaty had ho advocates whatever.—But is it
poiTibie that the writer did not know that there were
more than two defenders of the treaty ? - it is hardly
credible —-The treaty has been ably< defended hy a great
number of writers. A series of papers entitled the
Teok.r a list, is .i-.'ibhfhfd in the Centinel, which 1
liope to f.;e repub'liihed is a mafteriy perfor
mance. —Befidet all this, tho* thai Aurora writer may
nht know ft. a!' the world hefides knows it, that the
treaty has defenders in all parts of the union ; perhaps
the Aurora is the only paper 91 the United States which
doe- not afford feme evidence of ?hi3, and from justice
to the public I «xpc3 that the Editor of that papei will
r'epublifii thi:.
OB'fRVTR.
r,r .tkeVAZETTS of the UXITED STATES
MR. Ft;sNOi
■ IN reading your of I?.!l evening, I was
3ntck 'with the letter tigne 1 George'. Lux, (1 Bal
timore tr.ercha t) a'ddiefled, 1 suppose, to the
PreiVd.Ci't.
He fays, '' Mr. Jay's treaty in the niain met my
approbarioti ; but Ico ifefs elaufe admitting
Ci Britons and American: to h'jld property in'otir
"•'rxfpetftive countries, fills me with anguifli and
"-alarm."
It is the 9th article of the treaty which ha 3 pro
duced this fad efleft on the mind of that gentleman :
A > J as r.t my otiit rs, not yawing this fuhjeiSt in its
true li,'ht~ ar.v.i Cdnfequences, h t vc alfj been alarm
ed, I .will p.vferit y>>u with rr.y opinion tioon it,
and lias a relation to the fame fubje'dt,
the hold fig of land) in the 2d article.
■It is well known, that before our revolution,
■Ci-ften we were British fubje&s. man/ of out fellow
fuhje&s;. in other parts of the British doWn'nicris,
held-lands in what are now tlie Uiiited States.—
It is also well knovvii, that many Americans, who
firaliy adhered to theßriiijn in the revolution, heid
landed property. A large proportion of these lands
were confiscated, by the laws of the fevcral ftatcs;
b;:t by the titaty of peace an end was put to all
f fther cbnfifcatior.S. I would now afl< Mt. Lux,
whether the lands thus secured by that treaty a
giitlfl confifcatiotii ought not to remain the pro
perty of British fubjeds until they find it for their
irtereft to fell therrt ? For the treaty of peace pre
fcrihes no limits to the time of their holding them.
Since the revolution, some fiates have passed
la\Vs to enable foreigners, and of coUrff . British
fti ! jests; to purehafe and hold ISndi. I again ask,
whether British fubje<3s, who have ptlrchafed lands
ti ider ft;ch laws, ought not to.be fectued in the
enjoyment of them ?
H ere iheri we fee what lands are held by Btitifh
fiih;e<Ss :—-tHey ate fucb only as were guaranteed
so them by the treaty of peace, or which the laws
«jr particular states have authorised them to pur
chase. And what hotrefl man would deny their
ht Iding what they have thiis hcnefUy acqtiired ?
Further, let it be particularly, noticed, that the
words of Mr. Jay's treaty are, " British fubje&s
who noio hold lands in the territories of the United
States that i?, at the time of signing the treaty.
But how are the British fubjedts to hsld these
rati-
J letters—it has also
:.e uons away
lands ! The treaty informs us, " according to the
" nature and tenure of their respective estates and
" titles therein ; and'may grant, fell, or devise the
fame to whom they please, in like manner as if
"they were natives; and that they nor
" their heirs or afllgns, fhall></» / far as may rcfpcS
" the / "aid lands and the legjl remedies incident there
" to, be regarded as aliens."
Let us consider the effects of this provision, and
we shall fee casttins nothing to excite " an
gujfli '
-Ttifc.fmt part of the provision feciftes to Britilh
fubjefts only the property honeltiy and lawfully ac
quired, in the nrtannrr before ment-iorie'd. Their
• eiUtes may be bv moitgage, by leales-ior lives or
years, or in fee iimple. Whatever thi fe are, the
treaty feeures them. But " they may fell or de
vise tiieTaine io whom they please true'; but to
wl om are they likely to fell ? To actual settlers.
And who will be these actual ft tilers ? Either citi
zens of the United States, or emigrants from so
rifign countries for the pnrpofe of becoming actual
fetlleis, and Consequently American citizens. To'
the latter finely there will be no objection, when
1 all the (fates having vacant lands are continually
inviting and receiving foreigners among them.—
But Mr. Lux is quite in the horrors left " foreign
ers'of affluence ihould fettle on our frontiers, with
mvriads of tenants and other dependants."i Pray,
Mr. Lux, what at that time will be these foreign
ers of affluence and their myriads of dependants ?
When t'iey lhall have fettled on owr frontiers, will
they (fill be foreigners, or inhabitants ol the United
States ! If inhabitants, with their families and
iliterefts here, what mifchief is to be apprehended
from them, m ire than from the foreigiwrs whom
Maryland, Pe nfylvania, and other llatesf are year
ly admitting by thousands ? Or do you imagine,
that after ehooling and fettling in this land of liber
ty, as their home, they will obstinately maintain
the interefls of their former countries, in opposition
to this—that they will refufc to take the benefit of
our acts of naturalization—that they will refufc to
receive the privileges and rights of citizens ? Are
not the real objedts of all fucli emigiants to obtain
here more comfortable settlements, inheritances for
their children, and the full enjoyment of the rights
of in .1:1 ?
Suppose the Britifla fiibje&s, their heirs or as
signs, holding lands in the United Slates, fhouid
not emigrate hither and become fettlcrs, what will
be their co dition and their rights ? Why, by
Mr. Jay's treaty, the jujl property in the lands
hon ftly acquired as before mentioned, will remain
theirs ; but in all othe'r iefpefts, tbcfe land holders
will remain aliens. Their lands will be liable to
taxes, in common with the lands of our own citi
zens. They can deiive no benefit from them but
by the rife in their value or by rents. The latter
(rents) will not for many generations merit atten
tion in the Unit« 3 States j for every landlord knows
that here, where lands are so plenty, re:its will not
generally yield above two or three per cent, on the
#alue of the lands ; which, therefore, will not be
leafed to tenants, but fold to freeholders.
If these observations find a place in your paper,
I will fend you those 1 pvopoled to mrtke on the 2d
article of the treaty, relative to thrf Briti'h fuhjects
who hold lands within the present jurifdiitions of
the British posts.
A FREEHOLDER
Philadelphia, Auguil 11, 1795.
Mr. Fenno,
I cannot agree with Mr. Bache, (in the Aurora
of this day ) that you a e the author.of the infinite
variety, both in Itile and sentiment, with which
your paper abounds ; hut I draw, I hope, * fur
conclufian from his hint, viz. that he is chargeable
with all the illib.raiitf and invective which the Au
rora lias levelled againfl you and everv other con
fifteilt fed-ralift, as well as with all those p *-"?s in
his paper in favor of- a government by democratic
societies, to the exolulion of a government by the
people: lilt;wife with ill thofc {peculations agaitift
the doings of a majority in Congrlfs, in every in
fiance important to peace, government.
It is said that Mr. Bache is now tacking about :
he has nothing to fay against addreflers, courtiers,
&c. as on all former occasions In lhort, he
has become at lall a mod violent Hickler for pre
rogative, What can all this mean ? Is he really a
convert to order and good government, oris there
a snake in the gtn S ? The addreflers advise the
President to reconiider the treaty which he handed
to the Senate, altho' the fame has been ratified by
two thirds of that body : and this, altho* the said
editor knows, that there were repeated communica
tions between Mt. Jay and the Secretary of State,
during the negotiation, and that the treaty was de
layed for a long time on account of these commu
nications. This is the det.nier hope of the ar.ti
junto : they know that to destroy the treaty would
leave them a hope for war and confufion, for a ja
cobin goverm.Vnt, for a guillotine, and all other
charging appendages of disorder and confulion. If
thde facts are admitted, the President will not
tharik this editor, or any other new fangled friend,
who, like the addreflers at Richmond in Virginia,
advise the President to undo what they fay the Se
nate has t citified.
If the Striate had the power to ratify, there is
ctmjlilntionally an end to the business, or I do not
nnderftand the meaning us tfec word. As two
thirds of the members of the two branches of Con
gress make a law without the confent'of the Preii
dent, there can be little doubt of his fanftioning,
so far as is requisite, what two thirds of the Senate
have confirmed, in a treaty received throngh him.
Yours, CHRONUS.
August jo.
brum the Argus
Citizen Greenlpaf,
TO expatiate on the justice, power and refourcei
of Great Britain ; to jufttfy all her acts however
wantoh and unjust; to depreciate his own country,
and to place her its the wrong upon every occasion
are favourite themes with CAMILLUS. Hence
it was ro matter of surprise to find him in his third
number, attempting a formal vindication of Great-
Britsin far carrying away the negroes, and ridicul
ing our claim on that fubjefV. As this is the firft
number that contains any thing like argument, it
ought not to pass unnoticed. By &e,treaty of Pa
ris, his Bntaanio majesty agreed, "not to carry a
w y any negrogi from the United State»." This,
fays Camillas, m'uft mean either negroes which had
been, or which at the ceflation oF hostilities continued
to be American property. When the meaning of
ar. instrument is doubtful, there cannot be a fafer
or fairer way to obtain its true, sense, than by con
sidering its circumltances and views of the parties
at the time of making the contract, and that they
ailed with good faith to each other. To appl/
this rule during the latf war many negroes had
been taken by, or had voluntarily joined .he armies
or gone into the garrisons of Great Britain. Tu
reclaim them, and prevent their being carried away,
was an obje JJ which our commiffioneis had much at
heart, and it is not easy to conceive how this objedl
could have b en expressed in plainer or less
ous terms It will be remembered, that Franklin
had an agency in that treaty, and perhaps no man
ever excelled him in perspicuity and pertinency of
exprSlfion ; that those negroes and thole alone Were
in the contemplation of both parties, results from
the very nature of the cafe. It could not be neeef
fary to guard against new depredations of this kind
—peace being made all hoililities of every kind
ceased. As well a clause have been inserted,
to prohibit (hips of war,' of the different parties,
from makingprizeSdtlring the peace, as the captains
of such v tile Is would have been treated as pirates, f<>
nyght every negro, or his value been recovered by
a legn ar course of law, from any peifou who had
taken him after the peace, without any ihpulatiaii
in the treaty for that purpose. To confine this ar
ticle, therefore, to an engagement to abstain from
further plunder it rendering it altogether negative
and ufeleis. which is never to be supposed and can
not be prefum d to have been the intention of either
party. The reasoning of Camillus is conltrained
and contradictory ; in one breath he likens the ne
groes to " horses, cattle, and other nmvcables, and
as such liable to become booty in the next con
liders tiicm " as rational beings, and as entitled to
liberty under British proclamations, he concludes
it would have been odious and immoral io let them
pals again into slavery." Lpt ns belkow a moment,
for a m tnent will fuffice, to detedt the sophistry of
each of th.de arguments.
Admitting that flavcs may become booty, and ,
that their property becomes veiled in the captor,
has he not a right to reltore them if he pleases at a
peace? Did not this city belong ta the king of
Great Britain by conquest, and did he not agree to
evacuate it, rather than continue an unequal war ?
Did not the American artillery which he found in
our forts belong to him by the lame right, yet he
agreed to leave it behind? when He find* how «bly
his infradlions of t'*e treaty are defended byeurown
citizens, he will, no doubt, regret that he evacu
ated New-York as soon as he did, for the fame ar
gument which will be used by Camillas in his next
number, Vo juftify his detention of the Western-
PtilU, would apply equally strong to his having
kept gsrrifons till this time in our sea ports, the
prompt evacuation of which this writer coafideis :
rtither as a matter of grace in his majesty, than of '
obligation on his parr. To return—as the j
negroes which were taken, belonged to the king, J
he might prefer refloring them to their former own
ers, rather than be incumbered with their mainte
nance, which would probably have been theconfe- i
quence of gi'-'ing them iVetdom ; to have fold them,
would have ill comported with his dignity. It mull
beConfideitd also, that in refloiing them to their 1
mailers, he would take care to receive an equivalent
for such conrcfii n. What this equivalent was,
stone but the eommiflioners can know, perhaps they j
agreed to recommend the tories to mercy ill confide, j
ration of his majesty's reftorirtg the oegrois : what- |
eves the inducem -nt may h*ve been, he promises by j
an cxpreffion as iatitudinary as can well be devised
not to carry away any of them, that is, he will kate !
them all whether acquired by capture or enticed a- ]
way by his royal offers. If an exception had been j
intended, in favor of any class, it would have found !
its way into the treaty : none being made, the de
fciiption mud either be nugatory, or icxtend to all
the blacks, who were then living, and in the pow
er of his troops, arming them againil their mailers,
and not in makin j amends for such an abominable
warfare, by fending them home again ; but if such
promises were really made, or if a treaty of amity
and alliance, offensive and defenlive, a£luaily exitt,'
ed between his Biitannic majefly, and who bad not
been a&ually carried from the continent before the
treaty,
The other position cannot be supported without
charging the king wi'h tlie greatest duplicity and
want of good faitli, which I lhall not offend Camil
lus so much as to suppose his majelty capable of.
It would be odious and immoral, fay* he, :o return
to theii former mailers, negroes who had joined
them on a promise of liberty, Any other hut Ca
m.illus would have thought the immorality conlilt
■ ed in alluring them away, and thefwavthy domeltics
; of America, why not be explicit, and explain with
! good faith, to the plenipotentiaries, the fok mn en
gagement he was under j initcad of ilipulating a
j fpecific return, an equivalent might then have bten
j agreed upon ; or if faith mult be broken, either
( with the negroes, or,with the United States, would
it not have been a less reflection on Great-Britain,
;t P g' ve U P the former, whom (he was no longer able
;to protest, (as (he did the tories) and to whom she
was probably under no other than immoral engage
ments, contained in proclamations, issued upon the
sole authority of fo'/ne lavage officers, than to break
_in the very moment of signing a solemn com pad,
formally and deliberately entered into with the lat
ter ? Was she not under at solemn engagement to
the tories who had espoused her cause, and received
protections from her generals; yet their persons
and properties were abandoned, or, > which was the
fame things placed upon the precarious, footing
of a recommendation on the part of Congreftj for
favor and pardon the legislatures of the different
States. Not ajnan of this description who had been
banished, could return without a law for the pur
pole. > Does Camillas imagine that the interest of
these Africans lay nearer the heart of their gracious
monarch; whose virtues and hnmanity he takes so
much pleasure in blazoning, than those of his own
deluded fubje£ts, who. notvfrkhlta tiding his dclibe
rate facrifice of them, continue as firmly as everdc.
voted to him ?
But if his majesty be really ( what no one biit
Caraillus will fufpeft) to scrupulous about doing a«
odious a&ion, or breaking his plighted faith to his
black allies, why juftify him for keeping his word
at our expence ? If he be as juji, uu gnanimeas ami
Icucvelent as our envoy has rep refer, sod Kim, why
does he not pay for the liberty which he thought it
his duty to confer on our Haves ? Will Camillus
pretend that his majesty's abhorrence of fl.iwery in
duced him to carry the-fe people away ? The Weft
India I(lands wiil teltify againfi htm—his majesty,
like some people amu'ig ourieives (I do not mean
the Quakers, for I really believe ttttrtl to aft from
principle) if a great advocate for manumission, when
hij own interells or those of his fubjtCfs n re not >£-
fe&ed by it, or when the United States (notwith
ttanding his Unbounded affuSion lor them) are a
lone injured by it.
As fooil then as the Britilh king foUnd that his
recent engagements with this country could not be
executed fpecifieally without violating his anteced
ent prnmifes to the negroes, rnttead of qiiftjßlTSg
and putting on hifr agreement a eordlrudiou which
rendered it a daid Utter, lie would' have aited mure
confillent with ascribed ro him by the
fiiends of the present treaty, by candidly commu
nicating his embari ailments t-> our government. We
(ll«uld readily have cOfcfented to a pecuniary com
pensation ; Camillus, it is true, ajerts that " when,
a party pritmifes afpecitk tiling, nothing but the
thing itftlf will fatisfy the proinile."— Jr Camihuj
be a lawyer he certainly knows that jiothiagis ma»c"
common thip-a-fetitfadiion in damages torike brcach
of a promise to do S\ fpecific -hing'siid that in a great
variety of cases it'is the only fatiifadiion to which
the law can or will compel the dali lquent parry, ar,d
that such damages being paid, the proir.iie is as
completely faiisfted as by doing of the Ipec ifie thing.
Thus if a person contract to deliver me a ihip, or
a horse which he afterivards-fells to another, or to
come nearer co the cafe before us, je cup ago to rc
ftort me a negro which fwt away,
and thus puts a (pacific performance uiit.uf his pow
er, my only claim againil him is for ajcompenfation
commensurate to the i .jtny jfiitlaiited by his $teach
of promise. It would be absurd i« tbeex-tWme tor
America, at this time, to iiihtt upon a retain of
those negroes. Many are dead; i.id those who tu.-
vive, the greater part inu't be in the decline of lite,
and would be ot lntle tile to their f inicr nia'lns.
A com|ienf»uon then is all that ca) be.asked ; this
is precisely the controverts- between* the tw.j gov
ernments. The United States (an i Camiihis will
not contend agatnft their right so to do) ifkafe CI.
Britain from a fpecific compliance, and iniilt upou
an equivalent in money. With what o!he*r view
then, but to deceive, d.>e» Cam llus oblerve, thit
" the party to whom a promise is made, cannot be
required to accept in lieu of it an equivalent ? Did
he not know that the United Sntes were willi. g to
teceive, and asked for nothing more than an equi
valent, so that there- could be 110 -uecetfiiy of eisqui-
ring into the light of Great Bniaiu 10 loice thcia
to it.
It is proper to fuhjoin, • bat the cuti ft Million cf
thigarficle by Camillus ii oppokd toilie interpreta
tion which our government have uniformly put upon
it, is contrary to I lie explanation yf- it by Mr. Jcf
ferfon, whose correfpomicncc with Mr. Hammond
is recommended, as the belt antidote againlt the raif
chievous and humiliating do&rincs, f<> warmly in
culcated by this writer. Every American will turn
with pleaiure from a lab.ored panegyric of the Bri
tish government, a ttrcnucus and uncandid vindica
tion of all its arbitrary proct'ediiijjs towards this
country, and frtVm the degrading reprcLatation of
the United States, winch hll lo many columns of
Camillus, to the manly, energetic, (dignified and vet
fcandid examina ion of Jettetloii. in the writings
of this invaluable ftatefraan, he wilt dileovtr the true
fwurce of eontroverfy between the two couiHtirs.
He will be (hocked at the petlidy and duplicity of
Creat Britain, and will be aftuitiffced at the forbear
ance of the United States, under, the nn It aggra.
vated and unprovoked iiifulls and i: juries. It is a
work which should be in the hands of every man.
It will teach us tu loYe aud relptdt .our country, a
duty which cannot be too motivated, when
pains aie taken to'inftife a contrary fentimeiit.
1 shall only a fit, if Camillus is right, how hap
pened rt that a majority of tht Senate, a; their late
session, agreed to advise the Piefidcnt o jxpew ne
gociations with his majcjty tor a ompenfation for
the negroes who had been arried away contrary to
the 7th article of ihe treaty of peace ? When so
many refpedtable authorities concur rcfpc£tipg this
aggrefiiou, it would evince a becoming rnodefty in
Camillus to retradl an opinmn which ought to find
advocates only in the Brinfh Cabinet. CINNA.
" From the DAILY-AD/iRTfbER! '
CATO.—No. V.
I AM tt Tome lois to underhand what is intended
by the following words m the 3d article—« And in
Jjke manner a:I goo<.s and raierchandize, whose impor
tation into the United States fhal! not he wholly prohi
bited ; may .reely, for the purposes of comrwrct, be
tarried into t - e fame in manner rtfore/aid t by hitna*
jefly'j fubjetis ; a-ndtlie fame fhal I be fubjeA to no
higher > 0/* other duties than would be payable by the
citizens of the United States on the importation of the
lame in American veflels into the atlaotir ports of- the
laid states. The manner afarefard» alludes to the
former part of the article,, which g-rves the Brfcifc a
right to navigate our rivers from the sea to tiictogkcft
ports of entry for foreigners, and from thence by land
into the Indian country, jhe only natural corftrue
tion of Chefe words is, that the British fhallknve a right
to import into the United States upon the fa roe tern*
as Americans, and yet 1 can hardly conceive t\ zt Mr*
Jay could intend in *he face oi a law oi* tKe Ufiited
States (a<sl mak.ng further proviilon p. ;y*n<ent
of the debts of the United States, chap. 39 . fc. S.)
which imposes an additional duty of ten per trait, on
articles imported in vefiels not of thetffHMd Sutts;
I fay I should hardly conceive that he wottld prH&yraie
to enter into such stipulation dire<sMy in the fr e* c?
law of the United States, and that too in favo-ijr ©f a
nation wliofe navigation.a&, is at war w.th
merce ; did it not brtathe the fante spirit wi'Ji "fc;e
nth, 14th and 15th articles, all of wiich di
rectly at the navigation of thefa flakes, Nor &> 3
know any other lonllruclion that can paiQbly be- pttt
on the words whidt 11,avc ftatcd'at large, (hat „v w
Jeader may judjje ior himfett. Jt ithow* Mr*